80 • Introduction to Art Therapy
learning from the art that has been produced. Most art therapists, regardless of personal
style, see themselves as working artistically.
A principle that makes sense to me is to intervene—at all stages of the process—in the
least restrictive and most facilitating fashion. Although this may sound simple, it is a highly
developed skill, best refined through practice. While relevant for all therapists, it is especially
important in the specialized work of doing therapy through making and learning from art.
Basic Principles
Sometimes art therapists do things that do not involve patients or clients, such as teaching,
supervision, consultation, and research. The fundamental principles in each are identical to
those for direct service, and follow the same sort of sequence. For example, it always helps to
begin with some kind of assessment of the current situation. That means finding out where
a patient is for therapy, where a student is for teaching or supervision, and where an institu-
tion or individual is for consultation. When doing research, it is important to know what
has been done before by reviewing the literature.
After assessing a situation by gathering relevant data, the next step is to set reasonable
goals, and to decide how to proceed in order to achieve them. It is also necessary to form a
respectful alliance with those being served, so that the work is truly cooperative, whether it
is doing therapy, teaching, supervising, consulting, or conducting research. Ultimately, it is
also necessary to evaluate whether the goals have been met.
Selecting Art Therapy
When I was first invited to start a pilot program at the Pittsburgh Child Guidance Center, my
supervisor, Dr. Shapiro, asked me to find out how to select patients for art therapy. In March
of 1969, I went to New York with a list of questions for all the experienced art therapists
I interviewed. These included psychologist supporters of the field, like Ernest Harms and
Ionel Rapaport, and pioneer art therapists, like Edith Zierer, Edith Kramer, and Margaret
Naumburg. All of them agreed that the question of the “treatment of choice” was a compli-
cated one about which very little was known, especially in regard to the new discipline of
art therapy.
One suggestion was to do an art interview as part of the intake for everyone, and see how
they responded. Another suggestion was to ask clients whether or not they would like to
have art therapy. The beginnings of art therapy stemmed in part from spontaneous art by
the mentally ill, certainly a self-selection process. And in the early days of the field, some
artist-therapists traveled the wards, offering art supplies and assistance to whoever was
interested—like Adrian Hill in England or Prentiss Taylor at St. Elizabeth’s Hospital in the
United States.
Sometimes there was an open studio in a psychiatric hospital, where patients could come
and use art materials on a voluntary basis, like those of Edward Adamson or Mary Huntoon.
Although contemporary art therapists work in settings where people are generally referred
for treatment, it is also common to offer open groups as well, especially in long-term set-
tings. People in private practice often get clients who have decided to come, specifically
because they want to be treated by an art therapist. But that reminds us of a larger question:
Since resources of people and money are limited, why use art therapy as opposed to some
other kind of intervention? And how can we evaluate whether or not our efforts to help
through art have been effective?